Sorry, apparently the new GPGMail extension I have doesn't quite work right..  
Or I have a setting wrong..  Let's try this again without that enabled...

Hi all,

        OSSEC 2.6 on a CentOS 5.6 system.

        I was just nailed with an SSH brute force attack which =
apparently lasted a while.  I received a whole bunch of mails from OSSEC =
about it, yet it did nothing to stop it..  I understand why for some of =
the messages, but not others.

        For instance, the following triggered an active response, as =
expected, but unfortunately, the attack wasn't stopped because the =
reverse address was invalid.

OSSEC HIDS Notification.
2011 Aug 15 20:53:06

Received From: myserver->/var/log/secure
Rule: 5703 fired (level 10) -> "Possible breakin attempt (high number of =
reverse lookup errors)."
Portion of the log(s):

Aug 15 20:53:05 myserver sshd[23210]: reverse mapping checking =
getaddrinfo for 122-146-120-139.static.sparqnet.net failed - POSSIBLE =
BREAK-IN ATTEMPT!
Aug 15 20:53:01 myserver sshd[23207]: reverse mapping checking =
getaddrinfo for 122-146-120-139.static.sparqnet.net failed - POSSIBLE =
BREAK-IN ATTEMPT!
Aug 15 20:53:01 myserver sshd[23205]: reverse mapping checking =
getaddrinfo for 122-146-120-139.static.sparqnet.net failed - POSSIBLE =
BREAK-IN ATTEMPT!
Aug 15 20:52:57 myserver sshd[23178]: reverse mapping checking =
getaddrinfo for 122-146-120-139.static.sparqnet.net failed - POSSIBLE =
BREAK-IN ATTEMPT!
Aug 15 20:52:57 myserver sshd[23166]: reverse mapping checking =
getaddrinfo for 122-146-120-139.static.sparqnet.net failed - POSSIBLE =
BREAK-IN ATTEMPT!
Aug 15 20:52:54 myserver sshd[23141]: reverse mapping checking =
getaddrinfo for 122-146-120-139.static.sparqnet.net failed - POSSIBLE =
BREAK-IN ATTEMPT!

--END OF NOTIFICATION


[me@ myserver ~]$ host 122-146-120-139.static.sparqnet.net
Host 122-146-120-139.static.sparqnet.net not found: 3(NXDOMAIN)
[me@myserver ~]$=20


Sure, I get it.  Not sure how to prevent that one, though the forward =
address is easily handled by another alert, right?  Apparently not, =
though.  Here's the alert that never triggered an active response :


OSSEC HIDS Notification.
2011 Aug 15 21:02:52

Received From: myserver->/var/log/secure
Rule: 5551 fired (level 10) -> "Multiple failed logins in a small period =
of time."
Portion of the log(s):

Aug 15 21:02:51 myserver sshd[29303]: pam_unix(sshd:auth): =
authentication failure; logname=3D uid=3D0 euid=3D0 tty=3Dssh ruser=3D =
rhost=3D122.146.120.139=20
Aug 15 21:02:51 myserver sshd[29302]: pam_unix(sshd:auth): =
authentication failure; logname=3D uid=3D0 euid=3D0 tty=3Dssh ruser=3D =
rhost=3D122.146.120.139=20
Aug 15 21:02:47 myserver sshd[29220]: pam_unix(sshd:auth): =
authentication failure; logname=3D uid=3D0 euid=3D0 tty=3Dssh ruser=3D =
rhost=3D122.146.120.139=20
Aug 15 21:02:47 myserver sshd[29219]: pam_unix(sshd:auth): =
authentication failure; logname=3D uid=3D0 euid=3D0 tty=3Dssh ruser=3D =
rhost=3D122.146.120.139=20
Aug 15 21:02:43 myserver sshd[29213]: pam_unix(sshd:auth): =
authentication failure; logname=3D uid=3D0 euid=3D0 tty=3Dssh ruser=3D =
rhost=3D122.146.120.139=20
Aug 15 21:02:43 myserver sshd[29212]: pam_unix(sshd:auth): =
authentication failure; logname=3D uid=3D0 euid=3D0 tty=3Dssh ruser=3D =
rhost=3D122.146.120.139=20
Aug 15 21:02:39 myserver sshd[29209]: pam_unix(sshd:auth): =
authentication failure; logname=3D uid=3D0 euid=3D0 tty=3Dssh ruser=3D =
rhost=3D122.146.120.139=20
Aug 15 21:02:39 myserver sshd[29208]: pam_unix(sshd:auth): =
authentication failure; logname=3D uid=3D0 euid=3D0 tty=3Dssh ruser=3D =
rhost=3D122.146.120.139=20

--END OF NOTIFICATION


Nothing in the active response log.  Nothing in the ossec.log=85  Here =
are the last two entries in the ossec.log :

2011/08/15 19:04:35 ossec-syscheckd: INFO: Ending syscheck scan.
2011/08/15 21:09:35 ossec-syscheckd: INFO: Starting syscheck scan.

And a grep of rule 5551 from the active-responses.log :

[root@myserver logs]# grep 5551 active-responses.log
[root@myserver logs]#=20

So what gives?  My active response section in ossec.conf seems to be =
correct :

   <active-response>
      <command>firewall-drop</command>
      <location>local</location>
      <level>6</level>
      <timeout>21600</timeout>
      <repeated_offenders>720,1440,10080</repeated_offenders>
   </active-response>

I'm at a loss..  Any thoughts?

---------------------------
Jason 'XenoPhage' Frisvold
[email protected]
---------------------------
"Any sufficiently advanced magic is indistinguishable from technology."
- Niven's Inverse of Clarke's Third Law



Attachment: PGP.sig
Description: OpenPGP digital signature

Reply via email to